NYC pension funds want asset managers like BlackRock to have legitimate net-zero plans—or lose their business

Fast Company

3 days ago

As the Trump administration funnels money into fossil fuels and the country largely retreats on climate efforts, New York City is trying to ensure its pension funds take the climate into consideration.
In 2021, New York City officials announced that the city's pension funds divested an estimated $4 billion from fossil fuel companies, a landmark move in the effort to divest money from polluting industries. But divesting directly from these companies only covers a small portion of how the markets support the continued development of oil, gas, and coal. Major asset managers like BlackRock still invest in fossil fuels; so if a pension fund is invested in BlackRock, it's still essentially funneling money into oil, gas, and coal.
Now, those asset managers will have to show the city that their investments align with New York's climate goals, or they could risk losing the pension funds' business.
New York City Comptroller Brad Lander recently announced new climate standards for pension fund asset managers, including clear net-zero goals that decrease their scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Asset managers have until June 30 to submit their climate strategies to the city. Officials will evaluate those net-zero plans to ensure that they're 'real and actionable.' If an asset manager's plans fail to meet those climate standards, they'll be sent to a 'rebid' process, meaning they'll have to bid again for the pension funds' business, and the funds could then move their money to a different, cleaner asset manager. As part of any new bidding process, Lander will recommend evaluating an asset manager's corporate-level climate behavior as well.
'What we're doing is getting the New York City pension funds to use their buying power to shift money from dirtier money managers like BlackRock, who are bad on climate, to cleaner money managers,' says Pete Sikora, climate campaigns director with New York Communities for Change, a nonprofit that campaigned for these new standards. Activists hope that by taking business away from the less climate friendly asset managers, those companies will be forced to clean up their portfolios in order to get back the pension funds' business.
New York City's five pension funds have nearly $300 billion worth of investments, with a few hundred asset managers. The largest is BlackRock, which holds nearly $60 billion of the funds' investments. (In total, BlackRock has more than $11 trillion in assets under management.) The city's pension funds include the New York City Employees' Retirement System (NYCERS), Teachers' Retirement System (TRS), and Board of Education Retirement System (BERS), which have all historically been progressive on climate action; TRS is also the largest investor with $109 billion in assets. (The other two funds are the New York City Police Pension Fund and the New York City Fire Pension Fund.)
Already, since 2019, New York City's pension system has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 37%. It aims to be net-zero by 2040. This move to require climate plans from asset managers—and to stop investing with them if their climate plans aren't strong enough—is crucial to reaching that goal, Sikora says. It's a more impactful move than just divesting directly from fossil fuel companies, he notes, 'because it pushes the entire financial industry' to be cleaner. 'There's no way to stave off global climate catastrophe unless finance as a whole flees from oil, gas, coal, and deforestation,' he says.
The move is also a direct response to the Trump administration's efforts to funnel money into the fossil fuel industry, and to push back the entire country's climate progress.
'We will not retreat from our strong climate action, a position that remains consistent with our fiduciary duty. Climate risk is financial risk,' Lander said in a statement. 'Some may cave to the Trump administration and reverse their climate commitments, but we will not be deterred from jointly prioritizing our climate goals and financial responsibilities.' (Lander is running to be the Democratic candidate in New York City's mayoral race, and has made ' standing up to Donald Trump ' a tenet of his campaign.)
New York Communities for Change has been advocating for these climate standards for years, Sikora says, and was talking to Lander about the possibilities before he was even elected as comptroller in 2021. Before that role, Lander was on the city council, where he sponsored a resolution calling on BlackRock, JP Morgan Chase, Liberty Mutual, and other financial institutions to stop lending to and investing in the fossil fuel industry. That hinted to activists that he would be supportive of these efforts.
Though this effort was years in the making, it's becoming more urgent as the financial industry backslides on climate commitments at large. In January 2025, weeks before Trump took office, six major banks left the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, a group that was setting net-zero targets for the financial world. Still, some funds are trying to hold banks to account. In February, the People's Pension, one of the United Kingdom's largest pension funds, said it was 'prioritizing sustainability' by pulling a majority of its money out of State Street; the fund moved £20 billion to a different asset manager, Amundi, which it says has stronger climate standards.
Changes to New York City's pension funds won't happen immediately, though. After asset managers submit their climate plans to the city, officials have to review them before they make recommendations on whether to put the business up for rebid; those recommendations will likely start to happen in the summer or early fall.
New York City's move to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels did face a lawsuit from oil and gas companies in 2023; in 2024, the city won. These additional climate requirements may also face criticism or legal pushback, particularly from the Trump administration, but Sikora is confident it will hold up in court. Investing in fossil fuels is no longer a sure route to profitability; thousands of oil and gas assets are at risk of becoming stranded —meaning they would be unprofitable or forced to shut down years before planned—because of the impacts of climate change.
'New York City pension funds have an interest in a healthy world,' he says. 'You don't have New York City pension funds in a dead New York City that is submerged under rising seas. . . . On a basic, prudential level, you shouldn't be furthering your own destruction with your investments.'